A new FTBFS every day

[Gema Gomez]

Hey,

Why don't we just add some jobs to jenkins for Daniel to care for/look at?

Sounds like a compromise, Thomi can add them pretty easily then hand
them over to Daniel and job done from the mir team's perspective. They
don't even need to appear in any dashboard, they can be prefixed with
Daniel's name or some other prefix that excludes them from other
people's lists.

We have some jobs that are for a particular person or need, they are
testing something very particular and this doesn't need to be a burden
on others.

FWIW, Robert, I agree that automation is not always a blessing,
automation always comes at a cost, but if Daniel thinks it can help him
do something that otherwise is going to cause him (and possibly others)
grieve, then I think it may be worth at least trying.

Thomi, could we do that?

Just a thought in case it helps,
Gema

On 26/06/13 06:54, Daniel van Vugt wrote:
> Fair point. So don't CI it and I will wear the burden of owning raring
> support, as I already offered to.
> 
> 
> On 26/06/13 13:53, Robert Ancell wrote:
>> This is the important point: if we put this into CI it wont just be your
>> time spent - it will be everyone else having to change their branches to
>> satisfy a GCC we're not requiring.
>>
>> --Robert
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>> <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Put it this way: I will waste more time waiting for builds on my
>>     saucy machines, than I spend fixing the raring build failures (so I
>>     can build on my faster raring machine).
>>
>>     And the fixes so far have been trivial. When they're not, I will
>>     reconsider where my effort goes.
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 26/06/13 12:22, Robert Ancell wrote:
>>
>>         I do disagree that increased automation is better. In this
>> case our
>>         target platform is GCC 4.8 and slowing down to fix bugs in GCC
>>         4.7 isn't
>>         a worthwhile use of time. I appreciate there might be cases
>>         where these
>>         are genuine bugs that 4.8 is not detecting, but that seems
>> more of a
>>         problem in GCC than our code. Also, it seems highly likely for
>>         us to use
>>         a GCC 4.8 feature given we are already using modern C++ features.
>>
>>         --Robert
>>
>>
>>         On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>>         <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at __canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>>>
>>
>>         wrote:
>>
>>              I doubt people would object to increased automation, unless
>>         we start
>>              needing language features missing in gcc-4.7.
>>
>>
>>
>>              On 26/06/13 10:49, Thomi Richards wrote:
>>
>>                  Hi Daniel,
>>
>>
>>                  On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Daniel van Vugt
>>                  <daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>
>>                  <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at __canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>>
>>                  <mailto:daniel.van.vugt@
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt@>__cano__nical.com <http://canonical.com>
>>
>>                  <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at __canonical.com
>>         <mailto:daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com>>>>
>>
>>                  wrote:
>>
>>
>>                       Can we add raring CI support back in so these build
>>                  problems get
>>                       caught in time?
>>
>>
>>                  I believe that's a question for me, and the answer is
>>         "yes, we can".
>>                  Unless there are any objections, I'll add raring as a
>>         CI platform
>>                  tomorrow (thereby giving the list 12 hours to object).
>>
>>
>>                  Cheers,
>>
>>
>>                  --
>>                  Thomi Richards
>>         thomi.richards at canonical.com
>> <mailto:thomi.richards at canonical.com>
>>                  <mailto:thomi.richards at __canonical.com
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards at canonical.com>>
>>                  <mailto:thomi.richards@
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards@>__canon__ical.com <http://canonical.com>
>>
>>                  <mailto:thomi.richards at __canonical.com
>>         <mailto:thomi.richards at canonical.com>>>
>>
>>
>>              --
>>              Mir-devel mailing list
>>         Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
>>         <mailto:Mir-devel at lists.__ubuntu.com
>>         <mailto:Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>>
>>
>>              Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>         https://lists.ubuntu.com/____mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
>>         <https://lists.ubuntu.com/__mailman/listinfo/mir-devel>
>>              <https://lists.ubuntu.com/__mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
>>         <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel>>
>>
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Gema Gomez-Solano        <gema.gomez-solano at canonical.com>
Ubuntu QA Team           https://launchpad.net/~gema
Canonical Ltd.           http://www.canonical.com